The news of the Bharati launch of a nuclear powered submarine has caught no one by surprise. Indologists know that the only thing Bharati about this sub is the tri-colored paint and the Indian decals. Indian “Nuclear Sub” not “Nuclear”: Sailing empty without reactor

Its just a floating hull. There is no reactor on it. It has taken Delhi to about two and a half decades to put together the USSR era sub from a Soviet kit that was sold to Bharati (India) decades ago. The sub was originally supposed to have been launched in the 80s, then the 90s, then in 2002, then 2008.

Akula class sub kit from Moscow. Please place Tricolor decal on top of the Star and "Made in India" sticker on top of the hull. Don't forget to put the Nuclear Reactor or a power source or the Sub won't be able to move

Bangalore: India’s nuclear submarine INS Arihant, launched on July 26, does not have a “working nuclear reactor” yet, says a nuclear scientist familiar with the project almost since its start.

“If any of you are under the impression that it made contact with water with an actual reactor fitted inside its hull you are mistaken,” the scientist told a media service. 

The scientist echoes a report in Defence Professionals Daily, a German online publication, which says Arihant “currently is little more than a floating hull” without nuclear propulsion or weapons systems. The scientist, who did not want to be named as he was not authorised to speak to the media, was clarifying media reports implying that Arihant is propelled by nuclear power and that India has become the sixth nation to operate nuclear subs.

“I think the media did not correctly report what was told to them by the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), or the officials deliberately did not want to be explicit beyond a point,” he said.

The reports had said that Arihant is fitted with a nuclear power plant that is a replica of the secretly built 80-MW reactor at Kalpakkam near Chennai that was shown to the media Aug 2.

s Building this land-based power plant — for demonstration and training the naval personnel — is no doubt a creditable achievement of BARC considering that “making the fuel tubes were a real challenge”, the source said.

Besides, he said, it has proved India’s ability to produce enriched uranium necessary for designing small enough reactors that can fit inside the submarine.

The higher the enrichment, the smaller the size of the reactor and, according to the source, the Indian design uses 15 to 20 percent enrichment. The commercial Tarapur nuclear power plant, on the other hand, uses about three percent enriched imported uranium.

“However, to say a duplicate of this land-based reactor is already inside Arihant and working is not correct,” he said. He pointed out that the official statement that Arihant’s reactor will take at least a year to go critical is another way of saying there is no reactor core right now inside the hull since making a reactor critical only takes days, not months.

The scientist said several steps are involved after achieving criticality and the reactor must be fully tested before it is sent to the sea. Integrating the ballistic or cruise missiles will take time and a few more years are needed to prove the platform and its systems, first in harbour, then at sea and lastly, under water, at increasing depths.

“Therefore, announcement of India’s entry into the nuclear submarine club with a half-baked product without the nuclear reactor — let alone the weapons systems — is perhaps premature,” the scientist said. Samachar. http://publication.samachar.com/pub_article.php?id=5077712&nextids=5077709|5077710%20|5077711|5077712|5077713&nextIndex=4

The launch this July was not announced ahead of time, because it is not actually a launch. The sub still has to go through three or four years of testing. After the tests, corrective actions will be taken. The clunky, noisy Soviet era sub adds nothing to Bharat’s arsenal. It adds more junk to its fleet of ships. The Arihant is a copy of the Charlie class nuclear submarine leased from the Soviet Union in 1987.

“We will lease only one submarine. In my opinion, India needs the sub more for enhancing its prestige rather than for accomplishing specific goals,” Vyacheslav Dzirkaln, deputy head of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, said in an exclusive interview with RIA Novosti.

India reportedly paid $ 650 million for a 10-year lease of the 12,000-ton K-152 Nerpa, an Akula II class nuclear-powered attack submarine.

A nuclear sub was important for the Americans, because they could cruise close to the USSR. Soviet subs rarely made it across the Atlantic to American shores, but they sure did mess with the Scandinavians.

The report, entitled ‘BMF RF [Naval Military Fleet of the Russian Federation] on Foreign Warships’, says the main cause for the ‘collapse’ is the state of the Russian shipbuilding industry, which is “incapable of producing warships in either the quantity or at the level of quality that their navy customer requires” for the future. According to the analysis, the navy’s leadership “understands that this is a hopeless situation and are looking for a way out by considering the purchase of naval vessels from abroad”.

• But now it’s been revealed that the Arihant was launched without its nuclear reactor, which will not be ready for another year, or so.
• No one is saying for sure when the reactor will be ready. At that point, Arihant will have to go back into dry dock, be torn open, and have the reactor installed. Or parts of it, or just the fuel cores. It’s unclear exactly what state the Arihants reactor is in.
• What is known is that the Arihant cannot move under its own power (as it has none), and apparently is not equipped with weapons. Other major systems may also be missing.
• So why was the Arihant launched at all? Probably because work on the sub had been going on for more than a decade, and it was becoming embarrassing to have nothing to show for all that effort. Strategy Page 

The issue was raised during the International Military Naval Exposition (MVMS) that took place in the last week of June in St Petersburg. It is pedagogical to notice the state of affairs of Russian shipbuilding capacity. Russian Navy facing ‘irreversible collapse:’

Monday, July 13, 2009: The Russian Navy is currently on the verge of ‘irreversible collapse’, according to a recent analysis published by the authoritative Moscow-based weekly – the Independent Military Review .

The report, entitled ‘BMF RF [Naval Military Fleet of the Russian Federation] on Foreign Warships’, says the main cause for the ‘collapse’ is the state of the Russian shipbuilding industry, which is “incapable of producing warships in either the quantity or at the level of quality that their navy customer requires” for the future.

According to the analysis, the navy’s leadership “understands that this is a hopeless situation and are looking for a way out by considering the purchase of naval vessels from abroad”. The issue was raised during the International Military Naval Exposition (MVMS) that took place in the last week of June in St Petersburg.

The Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy, Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky, outlined the problem when he said: “Our [challenge] is how to significantly improve the condition of our fleet without destroying the economic activity in the country.” Also, according to the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy, Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky:

• It is useless to either repair or upgrade the old ships since they don’t have much life left in them (at most 10 years not 40-50 years)
• Russia may buy naval vessels from abroad!
• May buy submarines from Germany!

The only aircraft carrier building shipyard is in Ukaraine and Moscow has strained relations with Ukaraine from past many years. The only aircraft carrier building shipyard is in Ukaraine and Moscow has strained relations with Ukaraine from past many years. http://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20090622/155315485.html

Bharat’s latest steel tub doesn’t scare either Pakistan, or China. It doesn’t even scare, Nepal, Bhhutal, Sri Lanka or the Maldive. It just shows them that the bully of South Asia chooses to continue to squander the hard earned money of the penury stricken populace on toys that don’t work. Bharat has spent billions of Dollars.

After spending over a decade cloaked under an obscure project name, the Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) India’s first nuclear submarine finally gets a name: Arihant (destroyer of enemies), pulled out of a list with options like Astra. But more importantly, the Arihant propels India into an exclusive league of only five other nations who have designed and built their own nuclear-powered submarines. It also marks the first step towards the acquisition of the third leg of the nuclear triad— a secure underwater platform for launching nuclear weapons.

Based on the design of a Charlie-1 submarine which India leased from the former Soviet Union between 1987-’91, the submarine is currently housed in a completely-enclosed dry-dock called the Shipbuilding Centre (SBC) in Visakhapatnam. The launch, where the long, narrow dry dock is to be flooded with water from the harbor and the submarine floated out, is only the first step.

The Arihant is to be towed out of the SBC into an enclosed pier for its harbor trials. The trials will prove its nuclear power plant and auxiliary systems before it heads out into the Bay of Bengal for sea trials and weapon trials of the 12 K-15 ballistic missiles it is armed with. It will take the submarine between two and three years before commissioning.

In the meantime, the navy will get its first nuclear submarine, the Chakra, an Akula-2 class nuclear powered attack submarine currently undergoing sea trials in the Pacific Ocean off Vladivostok. The Chakra is to be commissioned later this year before sailing to Visakhapatnam. The submarine (known as the Nerpa in Russian service) is being acquired on a ten-year lease from Russia under a secret agreement signed in January 2004. India paid $ 650 million for the completion and lease of the submarine which is being acquired to rapidly train crews to man the fleet of three nuclear submarines which are to be inducted by 2015. Hull sections of two more ATVs have been completed by L&T at its Hazira facility and are to be transported to the SBC for assembling soon after the Arihant vacates dock space.

Nuclear Submarines are quite noisy the way they are and the Indian so called Advanced Technology Vessel (ATV) is a copy of the old Russian Charlie Class Submarines. How effective will be such a vessel; assuming the DRDO copies of its miniaturized nuclear reactors keep working perfectly?

Some defense analysts have over reacted and seem to think that the launch of the Arihant has changed the naval equation in South Asia.

The launch of India’s first missile-capable nuclear submarine, the latest proliferation of lethal WMD in the region, has serious implications for South Asia and beyond. It poses response choices for Pakistan to avert strategic imbalance. India must also reflect on what kind of an overarching architecture of relationship it wishes in the long term to evolve with Pakistan. How far is India’s strategic and conventional build-up a consequence of its threat perceptions or motivated by the objective of threat projection and hegemony. Furthermore the international community must reassess its responsibility for this deterioration and how it should act in future to support peace and security in South Asia.

Here is a defense analysts comments.

[India] seems to have bought virtually every Cold War Russian rust bucket! If the indigenous Indian Nuclear Submarine is that good, why bother leasing accident prone Russian leftover for US $ 650 Million? It is a miracle that Russians haven’t yet been implicated in any bribery scandal.

Mr. Khattak rightly points out that the Bharati sub is a Russian enterprise.

Russian footprints are clearly visible as far as the design of the submarine is concerned, and its assistance in the miniaturisation of the nuclear reactor would certainly have been unavoidable. If there were any doubts, the repeated expressions of gratitude from speakers during the launch ceremony for Russian assistance dispelled those doubts.

INS Arihant is believed to be powered by an 85-megawatt-capacity nuclear reactor and can acquire surface speeds of 22 to 28 km/hour (12-15 knots) and a submerged speed of up to 44 km/hour (24 knots). It has four launch tubes of 2.4- meters diameter each. Initially, it will be armed with three 0.74-meters diameter, K-15 (Sagarika) missiles with a range of 700 kilometres in each launch tube.

Subsequently, it will be armed with one 2.0-meters-diameter sea launched Agni III in each tube with a range of 3,500 kilometres. The sea trails are expected to take anything up to two years where the next milestone to watch is when the reactors onboard attain criticality. The Arihant would then enter the phase of induction of weapons and the whole exercise could take anything up to ten years from now. Taj M. Khattak. The News

Tariq Osman Hyder does make some cogent points about the Nuclear sub.

Pakistan continues to perceive that, while socio-economic progress and combating extremism constitute core objectives, its main existential threat continues to emanate from India. An India in which core policy makers and influential segments continue to regard the creation of Pakistan from “mother India” as a historical mistake, which at best may still be undone and till then Pakistan should be dealt with so that it gives up its support for Kashmiri self-determination and acquiesces to a subordinate role in South Asia.

Pakistan, though a significant middle order country, has always faced an asymmetrical imbalance and threat in the conventional field from a much larger India. Pakistan’s hard won nuclear capability has kept the peace by providing, through a credible minimum nuclear deterrent, strategic stability in South Asia.

The peace process, the composite dialogue which was set in motion between the two countries in 2004 was an effort to manage the different facets of this difficult relationship with the objective of resolving disputes in a peaceful manner acceptable to both sides so that both countries could increasingly concentrate on improving the lives of their peoples in a region which had increasingly fallen behind the rest of the world.

As part of the composite dialogue expert level talks were initiated on both nuclear and conventional CBMs. In the first Nuclear CBMs meeting in June 2004, both sides agreed that the nuclear capabilities of each other, which are based on their national security imperatives, constitute a factor for stability. Two main agreements on pre-notification of ballistic missile tests and reduction of risks of accidents related to nuclear weapons were signed. Even before India broke off the peace process after the Mumbai incident, the peace process had slowed down. There was no concrete movement on the core issue of Kashmir and no promise of movement on Siachin, Sir Creek and the Indus Waters which provide Pakistan’s life blood. While the nuclear CBMs agreements continue to hold, there was no forward movement and India wanted to de-link itself from Pakistan even in this nuclear CBMs field in which India reversed the maxim of thinking globally and acting locally.

In this India has been encouraged by a number of developments. The US-Indo nuclear deal was the high water mark of this bilateral strategic partnership. The United States lost the opportunity of encouraging nuclear restraint in South Asia while providing civil nuclear power to both fossil fuel deficit countries. The agreement enhanced India’s strategic capability, freeing its limited uranium reserves for military use and keeping eight reactors out of safeguards with the ability to produce fissile material for 280 nuclear weapons annually, apart from its equally un-safeguarded 13 breeder reactors programme.

The US, Israel and Russia agreed to cooperate with India for its ABM programme which would further destabilise the strategic balance and force Pakistan to increase its missile throw weight. India rejected and the international community did not support Pakistan’s proposal for a Strategic Restraint Regime with its three interlocking elements of conflict resolution, nuclear and missile restraint, including non-introduction of ABMs, and conventional balance, to avoid an unnecessary arms race.

Russia over almost two decades supported India’s nuclear submarine project through technology, technical advice and leasing of nuclear submarines. India’s cruise missile Brahmos was jointly developed with Russia.

The first stage of India’s nuclear submarine project is to build five submarines carrying 12 nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles at first with a range of between 300-700 kilometres and then of 3500 kilometres. The two Akula class submarines to be leased from Russia would carry some 48 ballistic missiles between them. Hence, this submarine-based part of the ambitious India nuclear triad of land-, air- and sea-based nuclear weapons would have some 100+ nuclear weapons at its disposal. The other air launched gravity nuclear weapons, land launched ballistic missiles, tactical nuclear weapons and land, air and sea launched cruise missiles would make up a formidable nuclear delivery capability.

India justifies this build-up as it claims that it faces potential threats from China as well as from Pakistan. While US wants to build up India as a counter to China’s growing influence, and Russia may wish to do so to a lesser degree apart from maintaining its strategic partnership with India in the face of growing American influence, given the growing economic and political relationship between India and China, no objective strategist has been able to postulate any credible conflict scenario between the two countries.

On the other hand, 95 percent of India’s military potential is targeted against Pakistan. The planned nuclear submarine fleet with its short range ballistic missiles or cruise missiles is Pakistan-specific

Despite policy statements of wanting better relations with Pakistan, India’s “Cold Start” or proactive military doctrine aims at giving India the ability of rapidly seizing parts of Pakistan while remaining under the nuclear threshold. Hence, while the nuclear submarine-based fleet has been justified to provide India with an assured second strike capability, which it claims is necessitated by its “no-first-use” doctrine, it will be used to reinforce the “cold start” objectives by reinforcing pressure on Pakistan not to use nuclear weapons, tactical or strategic, to deter or counter any Indian thrust into Pakistan.

Pakistan’s response has been that it will take all steps to safeguard its security and to maintain strategic balance in the region. What should Pakistan do?

1. First of all develop its own second strike nuclear submarine based capability on which it must have given some thought having been long aware of the Indian programme.
2. Secondly, equip its conventional submarines with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.
3. Thirdly, as the Russian assistance to India for this project, and the lack of any objection from the US or any other party has shown that both leasing of nuclear submarines and technology for their production are completely compatible with the global non-proliferation regime, Pakistan should explore such possibilities.
4. Fourthly, the most important lesson for Pakistan, a latecomer by necessity as a nuclear state, is that while it does not have to match India, nuclear weapon by nuclear weapon, even so, to maintain strategic stability in these changing and adverse ground realities, it will need to continue its modest fissile material production in the foreseeable future and cannot brook any developments or negotiations counter to this vital national security requirement. Hence, faced with these escalating threats Pakistan must oppose the initiation of negotiations on the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty, which countries, with their own comfortable fissile material stockpiles and who have also helped arm India, want to begin and prioritise in the conference on Disarmament in Geneva, specifically at Pakistan’s expense, and if negotiations begin, not to accept any outcome detrimental to Pakistan’ strategic and energy security. If our policy makers and negotiators in Geneva do not live up to this task they will never be forgiven by the nation.Strategic stability in South Asia. Saturday, August 01, 2009, Tariq Osman Hyder. The writer, a former diplomat, headed Pakistan’s delegation in talks with India on nuclear and conventional CBMs (2004-2007). Email: ambassador.tariqosmanhyder@ gmail.com

Mr. Khattak describes the Pakistan advantage in Submarines.

The Pakistani Navy’s Agosta 90-B submarines had been equipped with MESMA (module d’energies sous marine), and an Air Independent Propulsion system, which offered that extra battery power in high double-digit hours on hotel load at slow speed to evade enemy pursuit after an attack. This had been a qualitative advantage over the foe so far; admittedly not a very huge one, but an important one nonetheless, which now stands covered well beyond with one big leap of Arihant’s launching.

But in conventional warfare at sea, this advantage inherent in the Pakistani Navy’s submarines, as anyone with experience of being at the wrong end of depth-charge activity in war would vouch, is still a very big and a most welcome breather indeed. Taj Khattak. The News

The usualy pro-American and pro-Indian commentator Talat Masud says the following:

Induction of nuclear submarines is directed primarily to remove asymmetry with China that has 11 nuclear and 60 conventional submarines and has recently inducted three new nuclear submarines. Meanwhile, in the coming decade India plans to augment its surface ship fleet by an additional 40 ships.

Both India and China aim at expanding their influence in the waters of the Indian Ocean, Gulf and Malacca straits. They want to secure sea lanes by projecting power. United States and Russia are supportive of India’s ambitions. Talat Masud. The News

Bharat has never been able to gain a strategic advantage in South Asia. This rust bucket will not change things.

In days gone by the Naval history was written by the  Ghazi. “Ghazi, it may be recalled, had valiantly bottled the entire Indian Navy fleet in its harbours in the 1965 conflict, facilitating the Pakistani Navy’s surface fleet to have a shoot at Dwarka” (Taj Khattak. The News)

Mr. Khattak also says “Russian footprints are clearly visible as far as the design of the submarine is concerned, and its assistance in the miniaturisation of the nuclear reactor would certainly have been unavoidable. If there were any doubts, the repeated expressions of gratitude from speakers during the launch ceremony for Russian assistance dispelled those doubts.”

He also says “The Pakistani Navy’s Agosta 90-B submarines had been equipped with MESMA (module d’energies sous marine), and an Air Independent Propulsion system, which offered that extra battery power in high double-digit hours on hotel load at slow speed to evade enemy pursuit after an attack. This had been a qualitative advantage over the foe so far;”

He adds “But in conventional warfare at sea, this advantage inherent in the Pakistani Navy’s submarines, as anyone with experience of being at the wrong end of depth-charge activity in war would vouch, is still a very big and a most welcome breather indeed.”

Both Mr. Khokar and Ms. Mazari are pacifists who don’t want to embark in an arms race with Bharat. Pakistan will take the measures for minimum deterrence and Mutually Assured Destruction. This strategy has blunted Bharat’s Cold War strategy, and forced Bharat not to attack Pakistan in 1998, 2002 and 2008. It huffed and puffed but could not cross the border.

There was nothing hyped about Ghazi. It was just a sub. It worked. At the time less than half a dozen countries of the world owned subs. Pakistan was one of them. It destroyed Bharat’s Naval Headquarters in Dwarka and went after the Vikram keeping it at bay. Bharat at the time did not have the technology to shoot it down. On her way home, the valiant Ghazi ran into mechanical trouble. Its hull was recently found near Port Qasim recently. This was eons ago– not current information.

Right now Pakistan has Nuclear capable French technology based Agosta (http://pakistanledger.com/2008/09/24/pakistani-manufactured-agosta-class-submarine-hamza-launched/) and German technoloy based Nuclear capable 214 subs (http://rupeenews.com/2008/11/26/pakistans-214-submarines-made-in-karachi-with-german-help/) which were manufactured in the Karachi Shipyard. Unlike Russian based subs, the German Type 214 class has one of the most advanced submarines in the world. Equipped with a fuel cell propulsion system, the Type 214 submarines are the first of only two fuel cell propulsion system equipped submarines, the other being the Russian Lada class submarine. The first of the many 214s are being built at the Karachi Shipyard. The Karachi Shipyard & Engineering Works Limited (KSEW) has built ships in the past. In the 80s is built ships for China. The Hetian was one of them. The KSEW is undertaking shipbuilding projects for the Pakistan Navy, Karachi Port Trust (KPT), Maritime Security Agency (MSA) and Pakistan National

The Augosta and the 214s are the latest that technology can offer–very quiet, long downtime, and very lethal. Both Subs will augment Pakistan’s 2nd and 3rd strike capability–nuclear or otherwise. These subs along with ABSMs, and P22 frigates armed with Exocets and Shaheen showers are part of the minimum defense deterrant that Pakistan has.